Skip to main content

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: glenn Date: Jul 29, 2004 7:05am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Band Rant!!!!

as I understand it, once a band gioves permission to post their music it is irrevocable... so you could just go ahead and post it. rude though.
I think a great way is to not give permission to the public to upload everything (since I could record a great show and totally blow the recording process, then publish it, not good for the band OR the community)and to alow uploads by band representatives only.
Really,the bands aren't trying to keep you from their music, they just, understandably, want to keep their art sounding good.
It takes a lot of faith in the recording competence and goodwill of their fans for a band to have a wide-open trading policy like the grateful dead and other similar-policyied-bands.

Hey,I think you should feel honored to have a bandmember approve the quality of your recording, I sure wouldn't rant about it if Phil wanted to listen to my Dead show tapes or something.

I think it's very wise and enlightened for artists to realize they can give away their art without losing income... I'm willing to wait for any band to trust the fans enough to allow unsupervised play.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Jonathan Aizen Date: Jul 29, 2004 9:42am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Band Rant!!!!

as I understand it, once a band gioves permission to post their music it is irrevocable

I'm not sure where you got this impression, but it's absolutely wrong. A band can, at any time, and for any reason, revoke their permission and have all the content pulled. So it'd be in everyone's best interests respect the kind and generous artists who are hosted here.

alow uploads by band representatives only

This is done by some bands, and they seem satisfied. It unfortunately adds a significant burden to the work of our volunteers as they have to check a list every time they approve a show. However, this has worked out since few bands go this route.

Hope this clarifies things a bit.


This post was modified by Jonathan Aizen on 2004-07-29 16:42:21

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: glenn Date: Jul 30, 2004 3:58am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Band Rant!!!!

Thanks very much for the correction... I maybe should have been more precise:

Once a work is in the public domain it cannot be removed from the public domain. This much is well-settled law.

Regardless of them being able to withdraw permission,and remove their material, once a work is public domain, it cannot be copyrighted, (derivational works can be copyrighted - for instance, I could publish an illustrated Tom Sawyer, and copyright the work, however my copyright would not cover the words in the book but only the book itself and the illustrations, layout, typography, binding style, cover art, etc.) Samuel Clemens cannot copyright Tom Sawyer again once it is in the public domain, notwithstanding that his copyright ran out, and his work was not 'placed in the public domain', the effect is the same when a work is voluntarily placed in the public domain.

I think that Phish's lawyers understandably believe that granting permission to archive their music would be equivalent to putting it in the public domain... and therefore make it more difficult for them to exercise their lawyer skills to retain the band's financial interest in their own music.

I believe that if it were explicitly stated, that they do not give their work to the public domain when they archive on, that the handful of 'no permission' bands would grant permission.

However, new stuff makes lawyers nervous.

Don't beat Phish up over it.

It's not like 'they have the music, they just won't let us have any'...

...they are publishing as much live music as they can, so everyone can have it and not just those of us with a good net connection and a cd burner, or who are able to afford a portable sound studio and tickets to the show. (

This post was modified by glenn on 2004-07-30 10:58:24